politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Brexit deadlock: Some group has got to shift bit it is not
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Brexit deadlock: Some group has got to shift bit it is not clear who that will be
After another deadlocked day at Westminster the time is running out before the April 12th deadline and if the UK is not to slip out of the EU then without a deal then some grouping has got to change their previously set out strong position.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Or, perhaps the EU will make a real hard deadline. I can't help feeling that their not very immutable deadlines aren't helping.
The ballot paper has three either/or questions:
1. "Remain or No Deal"
2. "Remain or Deal"
3. "Deal or No Deal"
Whichever option wins both times it's up is the winner.
In the incredibly unlikely event that Remain beats No Deal, Deal beats Remain, and No Deal beats Deal, (or some other each option wins one round), then we simply choose the one with the highest "net" score.
Easypeasy. And I really don't see what the problem with doing it this way.
So, @Philip_Thompson would probably choose:
1. No Deal
2. Remain
3. No Deal
@Richard_Tyndall would probably go for:
1. No Deal
2. Deal
3. Deal
Etc.
This ensures that we find the Concordet Winner, which is what we should all be aiming for, right?
Given the EU will not change the WA, this is the clear and only way out.
There's no real room for voters to game the system - or at least not without risking getting something they really don't want.
The current situation means people deliberately lie.
If you are a Leaver, and you want us to Leave without a Deal, then it is incumbent upon you to convince more moderate Leavers that you think the Deal is worse than Remain. Because that's the only way you'll get what you want. But in the system I propose, lying is a dangerous game.
If Remain really is the Concordet winner, then so be it.
Remain would be favourite because Leave only just squeaked in before, so there's no scope to lose voters, and they'd lose some to Remain when faced with either of the specific ways of leaving that would be on the ballot. Plus, it's going worse than floating voters expected, and a lot of them are sick of it. Plus, the combination of Trump, a better economy and the Syrian refugee crisis easing has made immigration less unpopular than it was in developed countries.
None of it's at all a cert, but if you're a Leave supporter, and you've already won, you obviously don't want to roll the dice for anything less than a strong probability of a win, and they definitely don't have that.
Usually, if you go back to the voters and ask a question a second time, then they will tend to resent being asked again. I might point to the numerous times that byelections have been called due to some minor infraction of electoral law.
But that answers your other question. Rightly or wrongly leavers don't feel they should have to win another referendum. So it's just really hard to get leavers in general, and Tory MPs specifically, to back the idea of having another referendum, no matter how it's set up.
However, many of those same Leavers seem hellbent on taking the UK towards a "No Deal" exit, which was certainly not on the agenda back in 2016.
If the will of the people really is for No Deal Brexit, then my system will discover it. If Remain really is better than Deal, then so be it.
But if it turns out that most people would like to confirm the first referendum result, without dynamiting the Channel Tunnel, then that will be revealed too.
How might the electorate differentiate between competing claims of "all aircraft will/won't be grounded", "supermarket chiller cabinets will/will not be empty" and the like? A cacophony of lies and misrepresentations.
You might make the same point re GEs but the arguments have the merit of being more familiar.
You see, what has really scuppered her (IMHO) is that those who favour No Deal have pretended to the world that Remain was better than the Deal. Why? Because for those who voted Leave, if Deal was taken off the table, broke for No Deal. It was breathtakingly cynical, but it might well have worked.
Under my system honesty is rewarded.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyahEuxvBUk
Britain has few responsible MPs.
Given that the cabinet was abstaining you can hardly blame MPs for being equally responsible and still hunting for the unicorn the cabinet are also looking for
https://twitter.com/UK4Europe/status/1112846404718940162
I think Parliament has three chances left to avoid No Deal: a majority for one option on Wednesday that the Government can then accept and have a reasonable chance of implementing; MV4 with some major concession tacked onto it (a referendum, perhaps, has the best chance of passing); and, if those both fail, a straight Revoke vs No Deal vote on April 10th or 11th. True, the EU might also let us extend the A50 deadline again for more general pissing about, but I don't see what they have to gain from this.
Anyway, we haven't long left to find out what the denouement will be. If this does somehow end in a situation where we participate in the European Parliament elections then you may well get it - although, personally, I'd imagined that contest more as a bar room brawl from an old fashioned Western. The SNP ought to score a clear victory in Scotland, but South of the Border you could very easily see outright Dutchification: seven different parties (eight or nine in Wales) all within about ten points of each other.
Western Front WW1. Who will play the roles of the Strosstruppen/Americans?
When we next get to a General Election, the most important determinants of voting behaviour are still liable to be cultural/habit/robotic voting, and the perceived desirability or otherwise of Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister. The Leave/Remain divide is a factor, but it's not the be all and end all of everything. Not by a long chalk.
Or, to put it more succinctly, it's not possible to please everyone.
Avoid.
Yes, the Government could've sent a junior minister along to restate its long-held opinion that the will of the people, expressed in 2016, should be respected - but what would this have achieved? We knew this already. It would've been a waste of time.
If one were being crude then, theoretically, the whole event might best be described as one massive circle jerk for desperate hardcore Remainiacs. But I'm a good boy so will not stoop so low.
I don’t see anything in the campaign approach of Remain that shows they’ve learnt anything from the 1st: I expect they’d talk to themselves very loudly, and broadcast “I told you so” to everyone else.
Not the EU, not Ireland, not Dodds, not Corbyn.
It'll be May.
But, it would need to be imposed by Parliament under Letwin as legislation led by Parliament in recognition it had failed to do so.
Watching Steve Baker’s ego in full flood last night on BBC2’s Brexit documentary was nauseating.
A huge part of the problem lies with May. She sought to keep her party together with studied ambiguity for so long that both the ERG and the softest of remainers thought that they had her ear and support. Because they thought that they saw no need to compromise or to build a broader consensus. They still think the same way. If the ERG were persuaded that there was a real risk of no Brexit they would surely all compromise. Many did for May's deal last time out but enough still thought that if they just held on they could get their no deal fantasy. After last night they will be reinforced in that view.
The remainers/soft Brexiteers are in a slightly more difficult position. Until very recently, even yesterday, the momentum seemed to be with them and being in the CU with regulatory alignment seemed to have all the momentum. But the split between the CU and CM2.0 seems to have done for them as does the increasing number who will not support any Brexit without a second referendum.
Yesterday while driving I heard Jack Dromey and a female Conservative MP. They both represented constituencies which had car plants. They were in complete agreement and both entirely reasonable. What they were clearest about is the damage being done by the current uncertainty had to end and a choice had to be made. They will not be alone in their despair this morning.
But we have just got to find a way forward here.
I’d also expect Cummings to come back to Vote Leave.
Looking at the votes last night it only failed by three and that was because the TIGers and some of LDs cynically voted it down and there was some weird switching.
Truly truly wretched. I'd almost like to see a General Election just for the comedy value. Montgomery Brewster for PM.
Andy Pipkins: "I want that one....."
Lou Todd: "Are you sure now?"
Andy Pipkins: "Don't like it...."
Lou Todd: "What a kerfuffle!"
Andy Pipkins: "Yeah I know....."
Lou Todd: "Now, shall we have another round of voting?"
Andy Pipkins: "I want that one....."
Lou Todd: "Are you sure now?"
Andy Pipkins: "Yeah....."
pause
Andy Pipkins: "Don't like it....."
David Cameron's plan was to distance the Conservative party from UKIP. May has chosen to embrace them instead.
A Brexit-supporting minister is convinced that there is a reservoir of potential voters in Leave-voting constituencies who “want a sense of belonging” and could be won over to a patriotic Tory party. “One of the missing elements of ‘Modernisation 1.0’ was the failure to secure the support of working-class voters and people in the north and the Midlands,” he says. “They’re the people who have now come over.
One MP on the liberal wing concedes that the Tory party could turn itself into a right-wing populist party with working-class appeal: socially conservative, tough on crime and immigration, in favour of public spending. “It would be a kind of Ukip-lite, forcing Labour out of its northern strongholds, except in urban areas,” he says. “But it’s not a Tory party I would ever be able to be part of.”
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/ukip-infiltrators-will-tear-the-tories-apart-7jntwh5zx
https://twitter.com/JimHacker/status/1112963346792415232
The main thing for me is keeping the Marxists hands off the Treasury, MoD, Foreign Office, and Home Office for as long as possible.
But I don't think that he thinks that it is in his interests to resolve this. That second GE opportunity is tantalisingly close.
They’ve calculated (I think correctly) that it’ll be the Conservatives that take the blame.
http://propolis.io/dataviz/referendum_vs_petition/tool.html
I said then that the "Little England" line taken by Cameron was bloody stupid, and so it was. Adding Nigel Farage's name didn't improve it.
If there is another referendum then Remain, assuming that's an option, should emphasise what they see as the positives of membership.
So much of the debate yesterday are about options that will still be on the table if the WA goes through. I know it has already been trialed and failed on Friday but for me the current solution is to approve the WA but say to the EU we are still trying to decide what our future relationship with the EU should be so we would prefer not to have a PD at the moment. I think that they would be ok with that.
I think that the logical outcome of that would be that there would be a GE well within the 2 years of the transitional agreement so that a new Parliament with a new PM can decide what the arrangement with the EU should be.
The EU Leave vote was boosted by this exasperation. if Jezza were to go full-fat revoke or second referendum, he'd get a boost in the South, a temporary one at least. But that has to be weighed against the potential for a possible hand-sitting display in the North at the next GE.
Labour need to decide where its future lies, in the same way the Tory party does.
Why does it have to be an intersectional battle against your own white mans guilt ?
The anti-government vote will switch to anti-Brexit, and there may well be significantly different demograpghic splits to voting. Not nailed on but a #peoplesvote definitely favours Remain. It is why Leavers are afraid of it.